Our resident head Christian RI Pats Fan would tell you that people with progressive spirituality are more evil than the Westboro Baptist Church. That we aren't truly spiritual and that we all are murderers or support murderers because we by default support abortion and thus murder even though I am not pro-abortion. How's that for persecution? The two largest religions in Christianity and Islam are pretty quick to ask for tolerance but not eager to give it. So I stand by my statement that it's ironic.

Click to expand...

RIPF doesn't represent me. I can speak for myself, thanks. I don't think his views represent many other Christians on here either.

RIPF doesn't represent me. I can speak for myself, thanks. I don't think his views represent many other Christians on here either.

Click to expand...

I was making a point to the other poster based off the thread to that point. I grew up Catholic and thus have many family members and friends who are still Christians of one denomination or another. I no more think every Christian is evil or intolerant than I do every Muslim, Jew.........etc.

No offense intended to anybody who didn't declare people of similar views as myself more evil than Phelps.

So, consider that the end of the conversation on abortion, RIPfan. Please open an abortion thread if you would like to continue it.

Regarding the "persecution" of Christians, I still find it a curious claim. However, it's almost as strange to me that atheists/agnostics are not "persecuted" even to the rare extent that Catholics are, or even the more rarely persecuted protestants.

Once again, I'm using the hate crime stats as a proxy for "all persecution."

Are there other data sets we should consider? Some other way we can get at this by way of hard numbers?

Every year we're treated to claims of a "war on Christmas," which is defined by free individuals greeting each other with "happy holidays," or by the horror of a business doing likewise.

These are cases of other people doing as they like rather than including themselves in Christianity. This is what's called a "war."

And this is trotted out as the distilled essence of the persecution of Christians in America.

Are there any other data that support the premise that the American Christian super-majority is "persecuted"?

PFnV

Click to expand...

fwiw, VA, I can tell you that as an atheist / agnostic, I've never faced persecution. I have been insulted in ways that Christians would label as hateful and elitist (maybe even persecution?) if directed at Christians, but my own take was that those people were misguided and generally may not have even realized how insulting they were being. (These have often been Christian extended family members who've known nothing but other Christians and have lived pretty insular lives.)

(Oddly, the only time I've faced any sort of slurs have been when anti-Semitic slurs were leveled at me a couple times. On those occasions I wasn't quite sure how to react, given that I'm not Jewish. I did learn, however, that bigots don't like being laughed at because they can't even target their prejudice accurately, the dumbasses )

LOL Chico. When they're not in pogrom mode, you can almost forgive the dumbasses. People with an appreciable number of neocortical folds who nevertheless devote what brainpower they have to justifying or manipulating bigotry, on the other hand, have to be on somebody's shlitz-list somewhere, if there's a God.

fwiw, VA, I can tell you that as an atheist / agnostic, I've never faced persecution. I have been insulted in ways that Christians would label as hateful and elitist (maybe even persecution?) if directed at Christians, but my own take was that those people were misguided and generally may not have even realized how insulting they were being. (These have often been Christian extended family members who've known nothing but other Christians and have lived pretty insular lives.)

(Oddly, the only time I've faced any sort of slurs have been when anti-Semitic slurs were leveled at me a couple times. On those occasions I wasn't quite sure how to react, given that I'm not Jewish. I did learn, however, that bigots don't like being laughed at because they can't even target their prejudice accurately, the dumbasses )

Click to expand...

Being from Boston, I personally don't know anyone who goes to church on a regular basis. I would think most people here find people who do go to church every Sunday as weird.

I would think most people here find people who do go to church every Sunday as weird.

Click to expand...

Nah....two of my kids (one Catholic and one Evangelical) do....as does my brother-in-law's Catholic wife and child. And my Orthodox sister-in-law wouldn't miss weekly services, nor did my Reformed mother-in-law when she was alive. Nothing weird about it - it's what they believe in doing.

I see nothing in that catechism that dictates how individual Catholics are to vote or advocate, or their political beliefs about replacing a pluralist system with a theocracy following Catholic preferences.

You might have a leg to stand on, were you facing people urging all women to have an abortion. However, you are not. The vast majority of all pro-choice people state that it should be up to the woman herself, regardless of her religion. If she reads and follows this catechism, she will choose not to have an abortion, or to leave the Catholic church. If, however, she is not a Catholic, she will follow whichever religious or personal creed she feels is binding on herself, taking into account her own personal position in life as a pregnant woman, a perspective that often illuminates such a decision in the individual's life, and one that is unavailable in the personal experiences of the authors of the catechism.

I am not pro-abortion; I have never been faced with the decision, but I believe that those who do should have the choice to follow such a catechism or to have the abortion.

I see nothing here that would ban me from the Catholic church.

As to your slavery analogy, it may be valid within that set of Catholics who are not what you call "cafeteria Catholics" - that is, a small minority within the Catholic church, if they exist at all. After all, capitalism itself is built on coveting; and though that is from the actual decalog rather than your sunday school lessons, I am sure that Catholicism has retained some of the commandments in its instruction to the faithful, particularly among the Top 10. I think it would be difficult not to be a "cafeteria Catholic" to one extent or another, were one a Catholic.

However, for those of us who are not Catholics, cafeteria or otherwise, it's irrelevant.

It's as if I were to say to you, "Sure you can not root for the Jets, just like you can not personally hold a slave... but if you don't lobby for the Jets to be declared illegal for all time... (emoticon -> )

Even within your best shot from the catechism, there is no "black-letter law" that one cannot be pro-choice.

PFnV

Click to expand...

Um...sure there isn't....thanks for reading.

You do understand that the catechism is addressing all nations, not just the USA, right?

"The moment a positive law deprives a category of human beings of the protection which civil legislation ought to accord them, the state is denying the equality of all before the law. When the state does not place its power at the service of the rights of each citizen, and in particular of the more vulnerable, the very foundations of a state based on law are undermined. . . . As a consequence of the respect and protection which must be ensured for the unborn child from the moment of conception, the law must provide appropriate penal sanctions for every deliberate violation of the child's rights."81

Not all states are democracies or republics....."the law" refers to those who have power to influence the law either through a direct vote or voting for those who can enact laws. It's not going to address the American political system directly. That's why we have local Bishops who apply the teachings to their individual Dioceses.

The Catholic Bishops understand this teaching from the Catechism and state quite clearly that Catholics (when they have a choice) cannot vote for a candidate who supports abortion:

"It is a mistake with grave moral consequences to treat the destruction of innocent human life
merely as a matter of individual choice. A legal system that violates the basic right
to life on the grounds of choice is fundamentally flawed.

The direct and intentional destruction of innocent human life from the moment of conception
until natural death is always wrong and is not just one issue among many. It must
always be opposed.3

Catholics often face difficult choices about how to vote. This is why it is so important to vote according to a well-formed conscience that perceives the proper relationship among moral goods. A Catholic cannot vote for a candidate who takes a position in favor of an intrinsic evil, such as abortion or racism, if the voter’s intent is to support that position. In such cases a Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in grave evil."

The pontiff made his harshest remarks on record about abortion during his yearly "State of the World" address to diplomats sent to the Vatican on Monday. In one word, he made clear that he's not the progressive many women had hoped for, calling the practice of abortion "horrific."

"It is horrific even to think that there are children, victims of abortion, who will never see the light of day," he said during a section on the rights of children.

"Unfortunately, what is thrown away is not only food and dispensable objects, but often human beings themselves, who are discarded as unnecessary."

Nah....two of my kids (one Catholic and one Evangelical) do....as does my brother-in-law's Catholic wife and child. And my Orthodox sister-in-law wouldn't miss weekly services, nor did my Reformed mother-in-law when she was alive. Nothing weird about it - it's what they believe in doing.

Click to expand...

I was just arguing that nowadays in cities it's rare to find someone who goes to church every Sunday. And personally I find the ones who do as weird. I know outside of the city, the church is more of the community so it's more expected.

You do understand that the catechism is addressing all nations, not just the USA, right?

Click to expand...

I see that, despite your wailing, the catechism does not specify whether a Catholic can be pro-choice.

I see that you cannot establish that a Catholic must take anti-choice positions using the catechism.

I see that now you are moving from the catechism, which does not support your point, to a pamphlet from a collection of U.S. bishops, which you believe does support your point.

It is not, however, black-letter law for Catholics that they may not advocate for the right of a woman to choose in a secularist pluralist society, such as ours.

Thank you for proving my point by venue-shopping.

PFnV

"The moment a positive law deprives a category of human beings of the protection which civil legislation ought to accord them, the state is denying the equality of all before the law. When the state does not place its power at the service of the rights of each citizen, and in particular of the more vulnerable, the very foundations of a state based on law are undermined. . . . As a consequence of the respect and protection which must be ensured for the unborn child from the moment of conception, the law must provide appropriate penal sanctions for every deliberate violation of the child's rights."81

Not all states are democracies or republics....."the law" refers to those who have power to influence the law either through a direct vote or voting for those who can enact laws. It's not going to address the American political system directly. That's why we have local Bishops who apply the teachings to their individual Dioceses.

The Catholic Bishops understand this teaching from the Catechism and state quite clearly that Catholics (when they have a choice) cannot vote for a candidate who supports abortion:

"It is a mistake with grave moral consequences to treat the destruction of innocent human life
merely as a matter of individual choice. A legal system that violates the basic right
to life on the grounds of choice is fundamentally flawed.

The direct and intentional destruction of innocent human life from the moment of conception
until natural death is always wrong and is not just one issue among many. It must
always be opposed.3

Catholics often face difficult choices about how to vote. This is why it is so important to vote according to a well-formed conscience that perceives the proper relationship among moral goods. A Catholic cannot vote for a candidate who takes a position in favor of an intrinsic evil, such as abortion or racism, if the voter’s intent is to support that position. In such cases a Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in grave evil."